Agoracom

Your are wrong on just about every point. Either go to the law blogs and do more reading on the subject or dig up my posting history and read them.

Briefly, PTSC said no change in strategy of going after down stream companies. They still intend to do it that way. But that way only applies to down stream companies that purchased from chip manufactures that don't have a MMP license. PTSC didn't mention whether Quanta would have an effect on their short or long term revenues nor their previous licenses with chip manufactures.

Will the courts allow that??? Will the subject downstream company, counter sue the chip manufacture for indemnification? In that event, the chip manufacture will be dragged into the case.

Briefly, the supreme Court only ruled that in the event there is an unconditional license with the chip manufacture, a down stream chip purchaser can not be sued for infringement even if they were warned. Everything else was officially left unanswered. There was a hints to contract law and a conditional patent license. They want the lower courts to answer these questions.

A down stream company can not be sued by a patent holder for breach of contract when there is no contract between the two parties. Items sold subject to patent law have benefits that are not available to products sold under contract law. Anti trust laws apply to contract law and not patent law. There are also state and federal contract laws to consider.

There were at least two reasons TPL didn't want to go to court. The ex-parte situation and because as soon as the SC announced they would hear Quanta, it screwed up their chance of winning the case.

IMO

GLTAL